# State v. Shondel

> Utah Supreme Court · April 10, 1969 · 22 Utah 2d 343

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9568691

## Case

- **Full name:** The STATE of Utah, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Herbert Lee SHONDEL, Defendant and Appellant
- **Court:** Utah Supreme Court
- **Decided:** April 10, 1969
- **Citations:** 22 Utah 2d 343; 453 P.2d 146; 1969 Utah LEXIS 615
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Henriod
- **Judges:** Crockett, Henriod, Callister, Tuckett
- **Cited by:** 64 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9568691

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding when two statutes proscribe same criminal conduct, lesser of two punishments should be imposed

## Opinion text

HENRIOD, Justice
(dissenting).
I dissent. Í would be constrained to concur except for the statement in the main ■opinion that “where there is- doubt or uncertainty as to which of two punishments' is applicable to an offense an accused is en-, titled to the benefit of the lesser.” I believe that the .quoted statement should ' be the law, and is the law in at least a great majority of the states other than Utah. In saying this I refer to State v. Twitchell, 8 Utah 2d 314 , 333 P.2d 1075 (1959)' in which the author of the instant opinion concurred.' It seems to me that Twitchell flies in the teeth of the instant case, and unless over-' ruled, should be controlling here. It seems to me that the Twitchell case supports the conclusion arrived -at in Mr. Justice -El-lett’s dissent.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9568691. Public record. Not legal advice.